Re “Troubled by Mielke’s Self-Serving Attitude”
I'd like to take a moment and respond to a letter you received yesterday from Dan O’Brien in which he was critical of me and the Culver City Federation of Teachers.
I'm beginning to understand what public officials mean when they claim that their comments were misquoted or taken out of context. In this case, Mr. O'Brien creates a pretty good rant based on one half of a sentence, conveniently leaving out the second, and more meaningful half, of what I had to say.
In response to the current fiscal crisis facing public education in California, the Culver City Unified School District came to us earlier this year with a proposal for furlough days. Their proposal called for all employees to take five unpaid days next year, saving CCUSD about $1 million.
We responded by saying that, yes, teachers would take those five unpaid days but that we wanted the higher-paid administrative staff to take eight unpaid days and for lower-paid school support staff to take just three days.
Our plan would save CCUSD the same amount of money. But it but was structured in such a way that those who earned the most would pay the most, and those who earned the least would pay the least.
We're close to a compromise agreement somewhere between those two proposals. Talks are continuing.
Mr. O'Brien takes exception to a letter I sent out to teachers, letting them know that we would be sending out a survey regarding the placement of those furlough days.
Many teachers had indicated to us that they were willing to give up our staff development days, when pupils are not present, in order to minimize the effects on our students. Others said that the only way to change our underfunded public school system was to energize parents — and that would be more likely to happen if the furlough days fell on days when their kids ordinarily would be in school.
In my letter to our teachers, I tried to acknowledge that both positions are out there.
If you just read the first half of the sentence that Mr. O'Brien quotes, you might be angry at me, too.
But if you read the entire sentence, you might get a different impression. Let's read the whole thing:
“While many teachers believe we should take furlough days when kids are present so that parents and community members feel the pain too, YOUR UNION'S LEADERSHIP TEAM, IN KEEPING WITH OUR MANTRA OF 'KEEPING THE CUTS AWAY FROM THE KIDS', IS RECOMMENDING THAT SOME OF THOSE DAYS BE PUPIL-FREE DAYS.”
I've capitalized the second half of the sentence, the part that Mr. O'Brien left out. The whole sentence tells a different story from just the first half, doesn't it?
Finally, as a member of our community, I value an honest exchange of ideas. As a union leader, I accept legitimate criticism. But letters and comments that deliberately mislead others — does that kind of public discourse help any of us?
I don't think so.
Mr. Mielke, President of the Teachers Union, may be contacted at davidmielke@ccusd.org
